DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Interview Request
Applicant requested an interview on 04/23/2026. Examiner was out of office on the date the interview was requested. Examiner will accept an interview request at Applicant’s earliest convenience.
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on 05/28/2026. As directed by the amendment: claim(s) 1, 7, and 9-10 has/have been amended; claim(s) 8 has/have been cancelled and no new claim(s) has/have been added. Thus, claims 1-7 and 9-14 are presently pending in this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiyama et al (WO 2019111352) in view of Hierholzer, Jr. et al (US 3,846,726).
Regarding claim 1, Akiyama discloses a method of fabricating a thin film heater comprising: etching a metal sheet from two opposing sides to provide a planar heating element ([0025] “FIG. 5 is a view conceptually explaining a process in which a metal substrate dissolves gradually during double-sided etching.”);
and two extended contact legs (Fig. 2B #s 1522a-1522b electrode units) for connection to a power source.
However, Akiyama does not disclose a heater track which follows a circuitous path covering a heating area within a plane of the planar heating element; attaching the planar heating element to a flexible electrically insulating backing film.
Nonetheless, Hierholzer, Jr. in the same field of endeavor being thin film heating devices teaches a heater track (Fig. 3 #44 intermediate high resistance portion) which follows a circuitous path covering a heating area within a plane of the planar heating element (Col. 2 lines 53-57 --- The intermediate high resistance portion 44 is relatively narrow and of generally serpentine form with long, closely spaced, parallel portions extending transversely across the bimetal element and joined at their ends by relatively short portions.”);
attaching the planar heating element (Fig. 3 #42 heating elements) to a flexible electrically insulating backing film (Fig. 3 #40 thin flexible film; Col. 1 lines 61-67 ---" More specifically, it is an object to provide a bimetal actuator comprising a bimetal element and an electrical resistance heater therefor consisting of a thin film of insulating material bonded to the high temperature side of the bimetal element and a thin, flat, flexible, resistance heating element of serpentine form bonded to the film.”))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heater track of Akiyama by incorporating the circuitous shaped path bonded to the thin flexible film as taught by Hierholzer, Jr. for the benefit of compacting a considerable length, when required, into a small space, and creating longitudinal expansion to accommodate warping or flexing of the bimetal element with minimum stressing. (Hierholzer, Jr. Col. 2 last para.)
Regarding claim 2, Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. teaches the method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Akiyama teaches wherein the etching step comprises photoetching the metal sheet ([0050] lines 4-7 ---“:Here, as an example of producing the metal heater 152, description will be given by citing an example in which the metal heater 152 is made by applying photo-etch processing to the metal substrate BM1.”).
Regarding claim 3, Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. teaches the method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Hierholzer, Jr. teaches wherein the planar heating element is attached to a surface of the flexible electrically insulating backing film using an adhesive (Col. 3 lines 4-9 ---" The thin flexible metallic resistance element 42 may be constructed of copper, stainless steel, nichrome, or any other metal suitable for the purpose, and bonded to the film 40 by any suitable means as with a high temperature adhesive such as nitrile rubber.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. by incorporating the attaching the heating element to the backing film using an adhesive as taught by Hierholzer, Jr. for the benefit of bonding the heating element and the thin film using a suitable high temperature resistant adhesive. (Hierholzer, Jr. Col. 3 first para.)
Regarding claim 10, Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. teaches the method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Hierholzer, Jr. teaches attaching a second flexible film layer so as to enclose the heater track between the flexible electrically insulating backing film and the second flexible film layer (Abstract ---" In a second form, an additional thin, flexible, high temperature resistant, plastic film overlies and is bonded to the metal resistance element and exposed surfaces of the underlying film and bimetal.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. by incorporating the second film layer as taught by Hierholzer, Jr. for the benefit of operating the device at considerably higher temperature without delamination of the resistance element from the film. (Hierholzer, Jr. Col. 4 last para.)
Regarding claim 12, Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. teaches the method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Hierholzer, Jr. teaches wherein the flexible electrically insulating backing film comprises polyimide (Col. 3 lines 1-4 ---" The thin flexible film 40 may be of any suitable material, such as polyimide synthetic plastic, having the required flexibility, dielectric strength, toughness, and stability at operating temperature.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. by incorporating the polyimide backing film as taught by Hierholzer, Jr. for the benefit of providing a film having flexibility, dielectric strength, toughness, and stability at operating temperature.
Regarding claim 14, Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. teaches the method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Hierholzer, Jr. teaches wherein the flexible electrically insulating backing film has a thickness of less than 50 µm (Col. 3 lines 12-15 ---" It is to be understood that the flexible film 40 may be in the order of 0.001 of an inch thick, and the metallic resistance heating element may be in the order of 0.0005 to 0.001 of an inch thick.” The conversion factor for converting inches to micrometers is 1 inch = 25400 micrometers. Thus 0.001 x 25400 = 25.4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. by incorporating the polyimide backing film at a thickness of less than 50 µm as taught by Hierholzer, Jr. for the benefit of providing a film having flexibility, dielectric strength, toughness, and stability at operating temperature.
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiyama et al (WO 2019111352) in view of Hierholzer, Jr. et al (US 3,846,726) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Reinicke et al (US 6,141,497).
Regarding claim 4, Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. teaches the method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), but does not teach wherein the etching step comprises etching the metal sheet to provide two or more connected heating elements.
Nonetheless, Reinicke in the same field of endeavor being electric heating devices teaches wherein the etching step comprises etching the metal sheet to provide two or more connected heating elements (Col. 3 lines 21-25 ---" Thus, a standard wafer of 3-inch diameter and 0.015-inch thickness can serve for the simultaneous photo-etched reproduction of an array of 37 duplicate silicon-lamination area elements (0.375.times.0.375 inches square).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. by incorporating the etching step as taught by Reinicke for the benefit of fabricating multiple heating elements at the same time.
Regarding claim 5, Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. and Reinicke teaches the method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 4), and Reinicke teaches wherein the etching step comprises etching the metal sheet to provide two or more connected heating elements supported within a support frame (Col. 5 lines 59-67 ---" In FIG. 9, the double-line definition of 37 complete duplicate square configurations will be understood to suggest allowance for diamond saw or other cutting of individual square elements (e.g., 0.375 inch by 0.375 inch) from the entire wafer. The glass lamination is shown to be a 3.0.times.3.0 inch square panel which will be understood to have been bonded to all grooved surfaces throughout the wafer 35, prior to severance into single elements or multiple-element arrays.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. and Reinicke by incorporating the etching step as taught by Reinicke for the benefit of fabricating multiple heating elements at the same time, simplifying the fabrication of multiple thin film heaters.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiyama et al (WO 2019111352) in view of Hierholzer, Jr. et al (US 3,846,726) and Reinicke et al (US 6,141,497) as applied to claim 4, further in view of Lawson et al (US 5,925,275).
Regarding claim 6, Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. and Reinicke teaches the method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 4), and Reinicke teaches further comprising: detaching each of the two or more connected heating elements (Col. 3 lines 24-29 ---" Known techniques, such as diamond saws and laser beams, are available for cutting individual etched elements away from each other, it being preferred that the glass lamination shall have been bonded to the etched array prior to severing into individual but identical assemblies.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. and Reinicke by incorporating the detaching of each of the two or more connected heating elements as taught by Reinicke for the benefit of producing multiple heating elements at the same time.
However, Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. and Reinicke does not teach attaching each of the two or more connected heating elements to a corresponding piece of the flexible electrically insulating backing film.
Nonetheless, Lawson in the same field of endeavor being electric heating devices teaches attaching each of the two or more connected heating elements (Fig. 2 #22 resistive heater element; three heating elements are shown in Fig. 2) to a corresponding piece of the flexible electrically insulating backing film (Fig. 2 #70 dielectric layer).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. and Reinicke by incorporating the attaching each of the two or more connected heating elements to a corresponding piece of the flexible electrically insulating backing film as taught by Lawson for the benefit of arranging the heating elements in many possible configurations. (Lawson Col. 5 fourth para.)
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suetsugu et al (JP 2018203580 A) in view of Akiyama et al (WO 2019111352).
Regarding claim 7, Suetsugu discloses a method of fabricating a thin film heater comprising:
etching a metal sheet to provide two or more connected planar heating elements (Page 4 para. 10 ---" As a conductive material constituting the heating conductor 14, for example, a metal such as tungsten, molybdenum, nickel, chromium, copper, silver, platinum, aluminum, or a nickel-chromium alloy, bronze, brass, or the like containing these metals is patterned by etching.”);
attaching the two or more connected heating elements to a common flexible electrically insulating backing film (Fig. 9 shows the #14 heating elements attached to the #11 base layer);
cutting the common flexible electrically insulating backing film between the two or more heating elements to provide multiple assemblies comprising a single heater element attached to a flexible backing film (Abstract ---" A heated electrode sheet includes a base material layer (11 ), a pair of band-shaped bus bar electrodes (13) disposed on one surface of the base material layer, an exothermic conductor (14) disposed between the pair of bus bar electrodes, and a band-shaped spacer layer (15) disposed on the one surface of the base material layer and disposed at one side and the other side by interposing therebetween the bus bar electrodes and the exothermic conductor.”; Page 4 last para. ---" Thereby, the spacer layer 15 is finally cut and removed.” Examiner interprets that once the spacer layer is cut and removed, an individual heating element will be formed.).
However, Suetsugu does not teach etching a metal sheet from two opposing sides; cutting the common flexible electrically insulating backing film between the two or more heating elements to provide multiple assemblies comprising a single heater element attached to a flexible backing film.
Nonetheless, Akiyama in the same field of endeavor being electric heating devices teaches etching a metal sheet from two opposing sides ([0025] “FIG. 5 is a view conceptually explaining a process in which a metal substrate dissolves gradually during double-sided etching.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Suetsugu by incorporating the etching of a metal sheet from two opposing sides as taught by Akiyama for the benefit of being able to perform microfabrication with high accuracy.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiyama et al (WO 2019111352) Hierholzer, Jr. et al (US 3,846,726) as applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. teaches the method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), but does not teach wherein a length of the two extended contact legs is substantially equal to or greater than dimensions of the heating area.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a length of the two extended contact legs being substantially equal to or greater than dimensions of the heating area, since it has been held by the courts that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984),
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiyama et al (WO 2019111352) in view of Hierholzer, Jr. et al (US 3,846,726) as applied to claim 10, further in view of Lyubomirskiy et al (US 2015/0181936).
Regarding claim 11, Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. teaches the method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 10), but does not teach further wherein the second flexible film layer comprises a heat shrink material.
Nonetheless, Lyubomirskiy in the same field of endeavor being electric heating devices teaches wherein the second flexible film layer comprises a heat shrink material (Fig. 5B #18 heat-shrink tubing).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. by incorporating the heat shrink material as taught by Lyubomirskiy for the benefit of bending and/or adjusting the relative position of the heating element without tearing or otherwise rupturing. (Lyubomirskiy [0058])
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiyama et al (WO 2019111352) in view of Hierholzer, Jr. et al (US 3,846,726) as applied to claim 1, in view of Petit et al (US 6,054,690).
Regarding claim 13, Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. teaches the method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), but does not teach wherein the flexible electrically insulating backing film comprises PTFE.
Nonetheless, Petit teaches wherein the flexible electrically insulating backing film comprises PTFE (Col. 2 lines 7-12 ---" The thermoplastic or thermosetting material is, in particular, selected from polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), perfluoroalkoxyalkane (PEA), MFA, perfluoro-(ethylene-propylene) (FEP), ethylene-tetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), polyethyleneterephthalate (PET) and polyimide (KAPTON).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr. by incorporating the electrically insulating backing film as taught by Petit for the benefit of providing a film whose melting temperature is greater than the operating temperature of the heating element
Response to Arguments
A second Non-Final Office Action is being issued because of the change of interpretation of claim 8, now incorporated into claim 1, and claim 10 which were previously considered in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 01/29/2026
For claim 1:
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 4-6, filed 05/28/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Hierholzer, Jr. et al (US 3,846,726).
Applicant argues that the cited prior art does not teach a heater track following a circuitous path. Examiner respectfully agrees.
However, Hierholzer, Jr. does teach a heater track following a circuitous path. See the rejection of claim 1.
For claim 10:
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-7, filed 05/28/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 10 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Hierholzer, Jr. et al (US 3,846,726).
Applicant argues the cited prior art does not teach attaching a second flexible film layer so as to enclose the heater track between the flexible electrically insulating backing film and the second flexible film layer. Examiner respectfully agrees.
However, Hierholzer, Jr. teaches attaching a second flexible film layer so as to enclose the heater track between the flexible electrically insulating backing film and the second flexible film layer. See the rejection of claim 10.
For claim 11:
Applicant's arguments filed 05/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that it would not be obvious to combine the teaching of a heat shrink material for the second flexible film layers taught Lyubomirskiy with Akiyama in view of Hierholzer, Jr.. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Prior art reference Lyubomirsky teaches a heat shrink tubing ([0055] “The heater 3 comprises a heat-shrink material 18, which in the example shown is a length of heat-shrink tubing 18.”). Lyubomirsky is analogous art because Lyubomirsky discloses device comprising resistive heating elements that are covered by a thin film. Hierholzer, Jr. teaches the second film encasing the heating element but does not teach the second film being made from a heat-shrink material. It would be obvious to form the second film from a heat shrink material as taught by Lyubomirskiy because having the second film being made from a heat-shrink material is beneficial for covering the heating element with a film that bends and/or adjusts with the relative position of the heating element without tearing or otherwise rupturing.. See the rejection of claim 11.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOE E MILLS JR. whose telephone number is (571)272-8449. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at (571) 270-5569. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOE E MILLS JR./Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights